Analysing the Competency of Mathematical Modelling in Physics

A primary goal of physics is to create mathematical models that allow both predictions and explanations of physical phenomena. We weave maths extensively into our physics instruction beginning in high school, and the level and complexity of the maths we draw on grows as our students progress through a physics curriculum. Despite much research on the learning of both physics and math, the problem of how to successfully teach most of our students to use maths in physics effectively remains unsolved. A fundamental issue is that in physics, we don't just use maths, we think about the physical world with it. As a result, we make meaning with math-ematical symbology in a different way than mathematicians do. In this talk we analyze how developing the competency of mathematical modeling is more than just "learning to do math" but requires learning to blend physical meaning into mathematical representations and use that physical meaning in solving problems. Examples are drawn from across the curriculum.

[1]  Vyvyan Evans,et al.  Cognitive Linguistics: An Introduction , 2001 .

[2]  Edward F. Redish,et al.  Problem Solving and the Use of Math in Physics Courses. , 2006 .

[3]  Bruce L Sherin,et al.  How Students Understand Physics Equations , 2001 .

[4]  D. Griffiths.  Introduction to Electrodynamics , 2017 .

[5]  Jessica Watkins,et al.  Disciplinary Authenticity: Enriching the Reforms of Introductory Physics Courses for Life-Science Students. , 2011, 1109.4983.

[6]  V. Sawtelle,et al.  Chemical energy in an introductory physics course for the life sciences , 2013, 1308.3667.

[7]  Edward F. Redish,et al.  Language of Physics, Language of Math: Disciplinary Culture and Dynamic Epistemology , 2014 .

[8]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  An introduction to the bootstrap , 1993 .

[9]  Edward F. Redish,et al.  Epistemic Complexity and the Journeyman-Expert Transition. , 2012 .

[10]  Edward F. Redish,et al.  Analyzing Problem Solving Using Math in Physics: Epistemic Framing Via Warrants , 2009 .

[11]  Andrew Elby,et al.  Beyond deficit-based models of learners' cognition: Interpreting engineering students' difficulties with sense-making in terms of fine-grained epistemological and conceptual dynamics , 2010, 1003.4288.

[12]  Deborah Tannen,et al.  Framing in Discourse , 1993 .

[13]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .

[14]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Metaphors We Live By , 1980 .

[15]  Katerina V. Thompson,et al.  NEXUS/Physics: An interdisciplinary repurposing of physics for biologists , 2013, 1308.4947.

[16]  V. Sawtelle,et al.  Entropy and spontaneity in an introductory physics course for life science students , 2013, 1308.5433.

[17]  A. diSessa.  Toward an Epistemology of Physics , 1993 .

[18]  David Hammer,et al.  Student resources for learning introductory physics , 2000 .

[19]  Andrew Elby,et al.  Tapping Epistemological Resources for Learning Physics , 2003 .

[20]  G. Fauconnier,et al.  The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind''s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books , 2002 .

[21]  E. Redish.  Oersted Lecture 2013: How should we think about how our students think? , 2013, 1308.3911.

[22]  Toward better physics labs for future biologists , 2013, 1308.3882.

[23]  Andrew Elby,et al.  Beyond Epistemological Deficits: Dynamic explanations of engineering students’ difficulties with mathematical sense-making , 2011 .

[24]  Andrew Elby,et al.  On the Substance of a Sophisticated Epistemology. , 2001 .

[25]  E. Redish,et al.  Learning Each Other's Ropes: Negotiating Interdisciplinary Authenticity , 2012, CBE life sciences education.